Cheney Out. Giuliani In.

[CShine 0]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4065772

[Tigermike 3,711]

I wonder if Rudy has accepted?

[War Eagle 96 10]

I would be cool with a Rudy VP.

CShine, I looked at the Gillian Welch website last night and listened to the music...very cool. Kind of a bluesey, country, mountain-music type thing she's got goin on there. I think I might order a CD. Seems like sort of a liberal though, do I have that wrong?

[DKW 86 7,899]

I wanted Cheney out and Rice in. Sets up a great Hillary vs Condi Rice Race in 2008.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

this makes perfect sense AFA 2008 goes, if guils wants to be president.

i do not see cheney running for or winning the presidency in 2008; yet i think rudy would be hilary's worse nightmare.

she needs a weak GOP nominee....

all of that, btw, is predicated on a bush/??? victory in 04...otherwise, who knows!

ct

[Tiger Al 0]

What happens to all of these 'Hillary in 2008' speculations if the Democratic candidate wins in November? Seems to me that this year would've been her window of opportunity but she chose not to run.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

What happens to all of these 'Hillary in 2008' speculations if the Democratic candidate wins in November? Seems to me that this year would've been her window of opportunity but she chose not to run.

I for one would LOVE a Guiliani VP - his "liberal" stance on many social issues would be the perfect counter to Bush's more conservative approach, and would very much appeal to many middle of the road conservatives like me, who do not toe the party line on certain issues like gays, abortion, gun control and stem cell research. I htink his individual popularity would also bring in a HUGE number of fence sitters.

As for HIllary - I will be accused of hating her guts, which I mostly do, but in all honesty, I think that she and Bill will work behind the scenes to make sure a Dem is NOT elected this year. Hence their support of Weasley Clark, and their opposition to Dean. I think their plan has backfired as Kerry has come into his own, without their support - I doubt they saw that coming. If Kerry wins the nomination, I'll bet there will be some major butt kissing to get her on as VP, which would only postpone her plans until 2012 if Kerry somehow manages to beat Bush and then run again in 2008 as the incumbent.

Now THAT would be a GREAT time - VP Candidate Hilldabeast versus VP Candidate Guiliani in a debate!!!!!!!!! PRIME TIME, baby - I would pay to watch that!!!

[rexbo 104]

What happens to all of these 'Hillary in 2008' speculations if the Democratic candidate wins in November?

Hillary in 2008 will still be a great possibility. If any of the current crop of Democratic candidates wins in 2004, he will be such a failure as President that the Democrats will be scrambling for anyone to run as the Democrat in 2008...

[Jenny AU-92 0]

What happens to all of these 'Hillary in 2008' speculations if the Democratic candidate wins in November?

Hillary in 2008 will still be a great possibility. If any of the current crop of Democratic candidates wins in 2004, he will be such a failure as President that the Democrats will be scrambling for anyone to run as the Democrat in 2008...

ZING!!!!!!!! Man, that is right on the money!!!

You win "Post of the Day"!!!

[CarolinaTiger 0]

rush just said cheney would be a contender in 2008 for the GOP.

very interesting.

[DKW 86 7,899]

rush just said cheney would be a contender in 2008 for the GOP.

very interesting.

Rush needs to rethink it then. DC's health will be a huge factor. Maybe he meant DC will help lead the eventual nominee to the win!

DC will not be that nominee.

Rush needs to step away from the oxycotin. :roll:

[CCTAU 3,536]

I for one would LOVE a Guiliani VP - his "liberal" stance on many social issues would be the perfect counter to Bush's more conservative approach, and would  very much appeal to many middle of the road conservatives like me, who do not toe the party line on certain issues like gays, abortion, gun control and stem cell research.

Three out of four ain't bad.

But with his personal baggage, the dems would crucify him even though they feel the same way he does about some things.

What's wrong with the conservative view of gun control??

[rexbo 104]

I really like Cheny, I think he is the most level-headed, logical speaker for Bush's policies. He is probablly the driver behind the scenes in most of the strong stances that the US has taken over the past 3 years. However, I can see where his health problems, and his lack of media charisma can be a slight negative. I believe Bush would make a 10 or 15 point immediate jump in the polls, and have a much better chance of staying in office in Nov, if he were to got out on a limb a little bit with a new VP candidate. Besides, for 2008, this new VP candidate needs to be that person who can take on Hillary and win...

[Jenny AU-92 0]

What's wrong with the conservative view of gun control??

There's the "conservative view" and then there's "right wing militia extremist view". I favor gun ownership and concealed carry laws - own a gun myself - but I oppose "useless except for killing people" assault rifles and cop killer ammo, as I have mentioned several times already on this board. Let's not get into this here, as I already know your opinion too.

[rexbo 104]

What's wrong with the conservative view of gun control??

There's the "conservative view" and then there's "right wing militia extremist view". I favor gun ownership and concealed carry laws - own a gun myself - but I oppose "useless except for killing people" assault rifles and cop killer ammo, as I have mentioned several times already on this board. Let's not get into this here, as I already know your opinion too.

Wasn't the Second Amendment's intention for the American people to be armed in order to prevent the Federal Government from obtaining and abusing their powers, a guarentee if you will, of the other 9 Bill of Rights? And if so, then those arms would actually be for killing people, just like the rifles used by the Militia against the British soldiers during the American Revolution. And to continue that line of argument, not only should I be able to have assault rifles (within my well regulated militia, separate from the Federal Army), I should have my own tanks, handgrenades, surface to air missles, etc?

(I probably won't win Jenny's 'Post of the Day' with is one.)

[channonc 466]

Look, not to have this launch into a 2nd amendment debate, but I agree with Jenny. I have no problems with gun ownership, but what in the world do you want with an assault rifle. You want one of those, go join any of the branches of the military. There is no need for civilian ownership of assault rifles.

Also, most legal weapons can still kill people.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

THREAD HIJACK!! We already have a bajillion 2nd Amendment threads - go find one of those and my positions are right there.

This is about who GWB needs to have as his running mate - Rudy would be an EXCELLENT choice - but I would worry about Rudy's ego getting in the way - he is not used to being second banana, but on the other hand, it would set him up PERFECTLY for a 2008 run for Pres on his own, so that might be enough for him to suffer thru four years of #2.

[Tiger Al 0]

Look, not to have this launch into a 2nd amendment debate, but I agree with Jenny. I have no problems with gun ownership, but what in the world do you want with an assault rifle. You want one of those, go join any of the branches of the military. There is no need for civilian ownership of assault rifles.

Also, most legal weapons can still kill people.

I like Wesley Clark's take on this. If you want automatic rifles, join the army. We've got lots of them.

[channonc 466]

Totally agree TigerAl.

[CCTAU 3,536]

Look, not to have this launch into a 2nd amendment debate, but I agree with Jenny.  I have no problems with gun ownership, but what in the world do you want with an assault rifle.  You want one of those, go join any of the branches of the military.  There is no need for civilian ownership of assault rifles.

Also, most legal weapons can still kill people.

I like Wesley Clark's take on this. If you want automatic rifles, join the army. We've got lots of them.

That's why Clark will lose. There are many laws governing the sale and use of guns. There is NO difference between an "assault" rifle and any other gun. Once again, it's the people who commit the crime, not the weapon. It's all a bunch of liberal democratic word-spin.

And like I said before, Guiliani has too much personal baggage for the repubs to consider him.

[rexbo 104]

If you want automatic rifles, join the army. We've got lots of them.

Sounds like something Stalin or Hitler would have said...

(And I am not advocating everyone should go buy an automatic weapon, just continuing the hijacking of the thread...)